• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

Disney Irish

Premium Member
In an ideal world, WB would remain independent, but I don't think that's going to happen. So I hope regulators place appropriate conditions on the deal. Just like conditions were placed on the Disney-Fox deal. For starters, make them divest from the Sony and A24 play-1 deals.
Its not US regulators that would be of concern here, though they would still scrutinize the deal, its the EU and other foreign regulators that will be more likely to take a microscope to such issues and request such divestitures.
 

coffeefan

Well-Known Member
So you were not surprised by the reaction?

No. I honestly think there would have been reactions like that from anyone who was going to do the deal. What people would like to see is no deal. But that’s not possible. There are two outcomes of this deal, and we have a signed deal done.


Give me one that was proved false?

The general economics of the theatrical business were more positive than we had seen and we had modeled for ourselves.
It’s a healthy, profitable business for them. We weren’t in that business not because we hated it. We weren’t in that business because our business was doing so well.


I think people are still skeptical about this new commitment to the theatrical business.

I understand that folks are emotional about it because they love it and they don’t want it to go away. And they think that we’ve been doing things to make it go away. We haven’t.

When this deal closes, we will own a theatrical distribution engine that is phenomenal and produces billions of dollars of theatrical revenue that we don’t want to put at risk. We will run that business largely like it is today, with 45-day windows. I’m giving you a hard number. If we’re going to be in the theatrical business, and we are, we’re competitive people — we want to win. I want to win opening weekend. I want to win box office.

 
Last edited:

Disney Irish

Premium Member
So you were not surprised by the reaction?

No. I honestly think there would have been reactions like that from anyone who was going to do the deal. What people would like to see is no deal. But that’s not possible. There are two outcomes of this deal, and we have a signed deal done.


Give me one that was proved false?

The general economics of the theatrical business were more positive than we had seen and we had modeled for ourselves.
It’s a healthy, profitable business for them. We weren’t in that business not because we hated it. We weren’t in that business because our business was doing so well.


I think people are still skeptical about this new commitment to the theatrical business.

I understand that folks are emotional about it because they love it and they don’t want it to go away. And they think that we’ve been doing things to make it go away. We haven’t.

When this deal closes, we will own a theatrical distribution engine that is phenomenal and produces billions of dollars of theatrical revenue that we don’t want to put at risk. We will run that business largely like it is today, with 45-day windows. I’m giving you a hard number. If we’re going to be in the theatrical business, and we are, we’re competitive people — we want to win. I want to win opening weekend. I want to win box office.


Now had he said that 3 months ago when this all started he would have likely had less push back from everyone. And the question is why now? Sound like he is worried that people are starting to listen that Netflix buying WB is bad for theatrical, he is on a PR apology tour.

My stance is still the same, show me don’t tell me, it’s all lip service until you put it into practice Teddy. If you really have seen the error of your ways, well then start changing with your own movies before the merger even completes.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Now had he said that 3 months ago when this all started he would have likely had less push back from everyone. And the question is why now? Sound like he is worried that people are starting to listen that Netflix buying WB is bad for theatrical, he is on a PR apology tour.

My stance is still the same, show me don’t tell me, it’s all lip service until you put it into practice Teddy. If you really have seen the error of your ways, well then start changing with your own movies before the merger even completes.
He's saying this because he knows he'll have to do the normal 45-day window. Not only because of pressure from all of Hollywood and many, many content creators, but because it will probably be required of them by European regulators in order to OK the merger.

They can say that "of course we don't mind the 45-day stipulation... we were going to do it all along!!"
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
He's saying this because he knows he'll have to do the normal 45-day window. Not only because of pressure from all of Hollywood and many, many content creators, but because it will probably be required of them by European regulators in order to OK the merger.

They can say that "of course we don't mind the 45-day stipulation... we were going to do it all along!!"
My fear is that this is all just PR talk right now, just saying what is needed to get it approved. And that once everything is quieted down behind the scenes they've lower the window back to less than 30 days (after contracts expire of course).
 

DKampy

Well-Known Member
Now had he said that 3 months ago when this all started he would have likely had less push back from everyone. And the question is why now? Sound like he is worried that people are starting to listen that Netflix buying WB is bad for theatrical, he is on a PR apology tour.
That was my first thought…. Because he said it was a 17 day window just a couple of weeks ago… so what happened since then.., I hope he holds himself at his word
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Here we go, with another new movie for America previewing last night for this weekend's debut. This time, it's a sequel to the 28 Days franchise.

The rest of the box office is pretty standard, but it's worth reminding us how successful Zootopia 2 has been with its modest $150 Million budget! Kudos to Burbank for cutting budgets as much as they have on these tent pole movies!

Screenshot 2026-01-16 2.10.12 PM.png


 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Imagine actually calling a billion dollar movie a flop…
Has anyone actually called it a flop?

No. At least not in this thread.

I got Irish all riled up because I noted the factual box office information that Avatar 3 is notably under performing the box office of 2022's Avatar 2. Which it still is. It's looking to me like Avatar 3 will end its run with about 60% of the global box office of Avatar 2, not counting for inflation.

Adjusted for inflation, that number falls closer to 55% of the previous movie's global box office. That definitely qualifies as "under performing" the box office for Avatar 2.

It's obviously a huge hit but we can still consider the success and future of the franchise based on the diminishing returns.

Exactly! These Avatar movies cost $400 Million a piece to produce. Which means you've got to get to $1 Billion globally before you even break even. Oof! And there's two more in the pipeline at $400 Million a pop?

If Avatar 4 and 5 suffer the same type of diminishing returns from the previous movie, you land at a place where Avatar 4 makes $800 Million and Avatar 5 makes around $500 Million at the global box office, and they both lose hundreds of millions of dollars for Burbank, erasing all of the profits they made on Avatar 2 and 3.

The movies don't seem to generate much in the way of merchandise the way Marvel or Star Wars done.

Don't remind me. 🤣

The first Avatar was the whole reason why I started tracking Halloween costumes on my front porch for fun over a decade ago in a silly Disneyland thread. Fun Fact: Over a decade later, in two different Western states with very busy porches every October 31st, I have seen exactly ZERO Avatar costumes at my door.

Burbank has made Billions and Billions of dollars off of Cars merchandise, and 20 years after the movie came out you still see little boys wearing Mater and Lightning McQueen gear. We're at a place now where the first generation of boys who wore Cars merch in 2005 are now about to have their first child, and their sons will be wearing Cars merch too. 😲

That's why Disney spent $600 Million (in 2010 dollars, or about $900 Million in today's dollars) to build Cars Land at DCA. And that's why it's still about the busiest place in the entire Disneyland Resort and the land merchandise flies of the shelves.

The diminishing returns of Avatar box office and the almost entire lack of merchandise sales to any demographic begs the question, why did they build Avatar Land at DAK?
 
Last edited:

coffeefan

Well-Known Member
My stance is still the same, show me don’t tell me, it’s all lip service until you put it into practice Teddy. If you really have seen the error of your ways, well then start changing with your own movies before the merger even completes.

From what I understand, Netflix movies will still be on a case-by-case basis, albeit shorter window. The 45-day window will only be for WB movies. It's actually more generous than I expected, as I thought they would land between 21-30 day windows.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
The diminishing returns of Avatar box office and the almost entire lack of merchandise sales to any demographic begs the question, why did they build Avatar Land at DAK?
Because clearly Burbank has access to data that you don't that likely shows the ROI on Avatar is much more than the back of napkin math that you do.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
From what I understand, Netflix movies will still be on a case-by-case basis, albeit shorter window. The 45-day window will only be for WB movies. It's actually more generous than I expected, as I thought they would land between 21-30 day windows.
Again, its show me don't tell me, its lip service right now. Until we see Netflix actually release something with a longer window its still going be seen with a lot of skepticism.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Out of curiosity I wanted to see the 28 day domestic comparison for Avatar 2 and 3. Didn't realize it was that big a gap:

Avatar 2: $531.8 million (final total $684 million)
Avatar 3: $350.2 million (final total $451 million?)
The real question is is this something that is of concern for the overall franchise, ie fatigue, or just an interesting tidbit that is tied to the overall domestic box office trend we've seen over the last couple years.

Probably a little bit of both, but not really anything that can be answered in this thread.
 

Wendy Pleakley

Well-Known Member
Because clearly Burbank has access to data that you don't that likely shows the ROI on Avatar is much more than the back of napkin math that you do.

And honestly, despite the Avatar naysayers it's a well known and popular franchise. It's one of those movies that people who don't usually go to movies went out for.

A theme park land can't really be compared to a film franchise. Heck, Mr. Toad is still popular at Disneyland. When's the last time the average person watched Wind in the Willows?

The Avatar land will continue to be a draw regardless of any audience fatigue in terms of the film performance.
 

Wendy Pleakley

Well-Known Member
Out of curiosity I wanted to see the 28 day domestic comparison for Avatar 2 and 3. Didn't realize it was that big a gap:

Avatar 2: $531.8 million (final total $684 million)
Avatar 3: $350.2 million (final total $451 million?)

That's a big drop, but I will say it's not shocking given that the gap between 2 & 3 was much shorter than 1 & 2, and part 3 felt too similar to 2.

My guess is that part 4 will eventually benefit from a longer period to build up demand and offering something new in terms of story and character development.

Is it too soon to predict Avatar 4 performs comparably to Avatar 2?
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
A theme park land can't really be compared to a film franchise. Heck, Mr. Toad is still popular at Disneyland. When's the last time the average person watched Wind in the Willows?

Now that you mention it, I don't think I've ever watched Wind in the Willows, even once. 🤔

But to be fair to that utterly charming little dark ride; it's smack dab in the middle of the park at the confluence of two major thoroughfares in an extremely popular iconic land, it has a pitiful hourly capacity of 500-ish riders per hour, and it sits (again) smack dab in the middle of the busiest theme park on the planet.

The three Cars Land attractions have a combined capacity of about 3,000 riders per hour, for what that's worth.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom